Montana US House Candidate in Special Election Seeks Support

Libertarians this is our chance! Are you tired of the two party system yet? Most people are, but getting a third party candidate elected is pretty hard, but in Montana we have this amazing chance to win a federal congressional race in Montana. Ryan Zinke vacated his seat to become Secretary of the Interior leading to a special election May 25th. There is wide dissatisfaction in the state with the major party candidates.

The republican candidate Greg Gianforte is a software engineer from New Jersey. Montanans perceive Gianforte as an outsider trying to buy the election and his extreme right wing views are also alienating Montanans. He ran for Governor in November and is the only Republican to lose his bid for higher office. Tim Fox the Republican candidate for attorney general won his race by 90,000 votes, and Ryan Zinke for congress pulled 70,000 more votes than Gianforte in the same election. He also stared campaigning for office before he was nominated further upsetting Montana Republicans.

The democratic candidate is Rob Quist a country music singer who is in favor of sanctuary cities, gun registration and fully supports the ACA which are unpopular stands to take in rural Montana. He is trying to position himself as being the ultra-liberal in a state that voted 68% Trump.

Both national parties have failed to send money or people to Montana to help either candidate, leaving the race wide open for Mark L Wicks the Libertarian candidate to win the Libertarian Parties first national race.

This is an exciting time, we have never been so close to being able to win a state before! It takes your help though. Wicks is a political newcomer with no name recognition and needs help to raise awareness. We need donations to help the candidate Mark L Wicks to win. This is a quick fast race and your donation will help bring the first Libertarian in history into congress! If you can’t contribute financially you can contribute by liking his facebook page and sharing and liking his posts. This is free publicity that will help the Libertarian Party make history.

-Mark Wicks

You can support Mark’s campaign at his website here: https://wicksforfreedom.com
Please visit and like his Facebook page here: https://www.facebook.com/pg/lpcolorado/photos/?ref=page_internal

This entry was posted in Libertarian Party and tagged on by .

About Caryn Ann Harlos

Caryn Ann Harlos is a paralegal residing in Castle Rock, Colorado and presently serving as the Communications Director for the Libertarian Party of Colorado, Colorado State Coordinator for the Libertarian Party Radical Caucus, as well as Region 1 Representative on the Libertarian National Committee. Articles posted should NOT be considered the opinions of the LPCO, LPRC, or LNC nor always those of Caryn Ann Harlos personally. Caryn Ann’s goal is to provide information on items of interest and (sometimes) controversy about the Libertarian Party and minor parties in general not to necessarily endorse the contents.

31 thoughts on “Montana US House Candidate in Special Election Seeks Support

  1. Sandy Sanders

    Caryn:

    Can I repost your post on the blog I write for? Virginia Right – just send me an email at ssanders [at] varight.com.

    Otherwise, I’d do a nice article on this too.

    Sandy Sanders

  2. Just Some Random Guy

    Thanks for posting this. I did give him a small donation. Every little bit helps.

  3. Carol Moore

    Oh, goodie, he’s going to let me keep sucking off the govt teat! I figure in 40 years I put about $15,000 in medicare and medicaid as a part time/temp worker. And in 5 years I’ve already gotten about $120,000 back in mostly medicare. (Mostly obesity related: gall bladder and uterine polyp and testing testing testing.) Gosh, so I can keep eating those bon bons and sitting on my fat butt for another 20 years, since the women in our family live long.

    Hope you young uns are working hard to pay that ever growing portion of your wages to support ME ME ME!!! And forget about buying a house or having kids. You have to support ME ME ME!!!

    Get 2 or 3 housemates and you can move out of mommies social security supported basement.

    Geez, where do these “libertarians” come from. Pretty sad…

    But he probably wants to outlaw abortion and save the fetuses, eh??

  4. Carol Moore

    OK, for the lazy, here is what carol is ranting about…

    https://wicksforfreedom.com/issues/
    SOCIAL SECURITY

    Wicks knows that for far too many retirees, Social Security is the only retirement funds they will receive. “For many farmers and ranchers,” Wicks says, “it is the only way they can retire and pass the farm down to the next generation.”

    That is why his highest priority as a congressman is reducing the debt to keep Social Security stable for this generation and the next. Social security is not a handout. You paid for it, you deserve to get it!

  5. Andy

    I don’t know the details of what exactly this candidate is proposing in regard to Social Security, but if Social Security is to be eliminated, which I agree that it needs to be, it should be done so in a way that does not hang everyone out to dry that is currently at or close to retirement age, as in set the younger free from this program, but still pay off the older people. Harry Browne had a good plan to do this by selling off government assets that were either unnecessary government assets, which included anything not authorized by the Constitution, and using the proceeds to pay off debts and liquidate Social Security.

  6. Carol Moore

    You are correct Andy. And because you are correct sometimes I don’t blazing hot noodle you too often. 🙂

  7. Andy

    Carol Moore said: “But he probably wants to outlaw abortion and save the fetuses, eh??”

    I don’t know where this candidate stands on abortion (as I said on another thread, I don’t think there is really much that can be realistically be done with this issue barring a shift in attitudes among a lot of the public), but you seem to not recognize a fetus as being a life, and if you do recognize a fetus as a life, you obviously have a pretty callous attitude.

    So if a fetus is not a life, what is it? Is a fetus no more than a hair follicle or a toe nail?

    Can you describe for us what exactly happens during an abortion? Would you feel comfortable crushing the skull a fetus, or stabbing a fetus with a knife? What happens to the fetus after the abortion is over? Is a fetus like hair in a barber shop, something to be swept up by a broom and forgotten about? Do you see any difference between a fetus and a hair follicle?

  8. Andy

    Saying that you want to eliminate Social Security WITHOUT having a plan to pay off all of the older people currently dependent on the program, which if done without a plan to pay these people off, would create a DISASTER, is a foolish as those who want to “open the borders” so everyone on the planet can waltz in with no questions asked, WITHOUT first changing any other laws, like the welfare state, qualifications for citizenship and voting in elections, forced association, and government control of land and infrastructure.

    “Open borders” would only work in an anarcho-capitalist society, a society which would not actually have “open borders” since all land would be privately owned, and migration/immigration policies would be set by land owners.

    Calling for “open borders” in a democratic welfare state, which is what we defacto live in today, is stupid, and it is not only stupid, it is actually in line with socialists and communists and New World Order global government types, as in it does not have a damn thing to do with libertarianism.

  9. paulie

    Wicks’ position on SS is a lot different than Browne’s. A plan to end SS without a transition is a red herring to the discussion, since neither Wicks nor anyone else here has proposed such a plan.

    What a fetus is changes as it develops. At the start it is little more than a toenail or hair follicle. At the end it’s born and becomes a baby. Near the end, where it is viable and could be a baby if labor were induced, I don’t think it’s right to say that it’s little more than a toenail. Near the beginning, when it has less cognitive development than a mouse, I don’t think it’s reasonable to say that it’s a human person with rights. Somewhere in between is a transitional phase where it comes closer and closer to being reasonably viewed as having some rights of its own. Those rights don’t necessarily include the right to occupy an unwilling host until it becomes self-sufficient.

    Andy is completely wrong about open borders, of course, and I have a new article coming out about that this weekend.

    I should also note that Andy is hijacking yet another thread to bring discussion of immigration when no one was talking about it. This is getting more than a little tiresome, and we have received a number of complaints through a variety of media (email, fb, personal and phone conversations etc) from various forum readers about this specifically. Please cut out or at least limit the excessive threadjacking.

  10. Great ideas

    Anthony Dlugos is right, Andy Jacobs’s obsession with the immigration and (despite his claims otherwise) abortion issues, and his anti-freedom and anti-choice views on both issues, belong far more in the Constitution Party or the Trumptardified GOP than in the LP. Andy is a right wing nut in the mold of his heroes Alex Jones, Steve Molyneux, Hans Hoppe, Chris Cantwell, et al. Andy Jacobs is that Augustus Invictus “Libertarian”… that Nathan Larson “Libertarian” … that Chris Lesiak “Libertarian,” that Commander Bill White “Libertarian,” that Eric Rittberg “Libertarian,” that Martin Lindstedt “Libertarian,” that David Macko “Libertarian,” that Ron Paul Newsletters “Libertarian,” that confederate flag “Libertarian,” that Lew Rockwell far right “libertarian,” that “helicopter rides” “libertarian,” that FBI saboteur “libertarian”….

  11. Great ideas

    Andy Jacobs: “you seem to not recognize a fetus as being a life, and if you do recognize a fetus as a life, you obviously have a pretty callous attitude.

    So if a fetus is not a life, what is it? Is a fetus no more than a hair follicle or a toe nail?

    Can you describe for us what exactly happens during an abortion? Would you feel comfortable crushing the skull a fetus, or stabbing a fetus with a knife? What happens to the fetus after the abortion is over? Is a fetus like hair in a barber shop, something to be swept up by a broom and forgotten about? Do you see any difference between a fetus and a hair follicle?”

    …..

    As posted yesterday morning in a different article discussion here:

    Andy Jacobs a few days ago in this thread: “I am NOT an abortion based voter. I am not a hardcore pro-life activist. …. Abortion has never been a high priority issue for me either way…”

    Andy Jacobs last night: ““Rape would be the only moral justification I could see for abortion.”

    So it’s not a high priority issue for you, but you believe we have a legalized holocaust of millions of babies a year going on right now and you want to enslave millions of women to months of hard labor against their will based on a creepy feeling you got once when you were driving around? Somehow this does not add up. If you really believed that millions of children were being murdered every year, legally, how could that not be a high priority issue for you? If you have ever been with or around a woman as she went through a pregnancy, how could you want to force millions of women to do that against their will if it’s not a high priority issue for you? If you believe that a fetus is a child how could you be for sentencing children to death for something their father did? It’s pretty obvious that you don’t really believe abortion is the same thing as murdering a child, and just all the time you have spent arguing about in on IPR alone shows that it probably is a pretty important issue for you.

    Based on the above…It seems highly likely that you have a different agenda than what you want us to believe. Maybe you just don’t want to admit that you want to enslave and control women. At least Nathan Larson is honest about his intentions in that regard, unlike you. Betting that you are heavily into reading the sick, creepy “manosphere” and “pick up artist” propaganda just like Nathan Larson is. But, you are a less honest individual than he is. Hmmmm…wonder what else you are not so honest about?

  12. Great ideas

    As also posted in that thread:

    Even most people who claim that a pregnancy may be justifiably forced on a woman will concede that a woman should have the right to withdraw consent during sex and have her partner(s) stop. They will typically also grant that if she does carry a pregnancy to term she should have the right to give the child up, no questions asked, at any time after the child is born. Yet they insist that a woman must be enslaved to a fetus that she does not want for nine months or sometimes longer, a condition of non-autonomy over her own body that never exists before or after a pregnancy and does not exist at all for men at any point in their lives.

    The idea that consent to sex is some kind of implicit consent to pregnancy places a far higher burden on women than on men in consenting to sex, which is the real reason behind abortion restrictions: to control women’s sexuality, punish them for promiscuity, enslave them for being in a relationship or put them impossibly between a rock and a hard place when they are impregnated by rape, particularly by someone they are close to or in muddled circumstances. “Lifeboat” scenarios also rely on the fiction that there is a person there prior to the pregnancy that a woman owes safe passage to, even though there clearly wasn’t. Consent to have sex is consent to have sex and nothing else, and can be withdrawn at any point. Consent to raise a child can also be withdrawn. At no point during sex or child raising is slavery justified, except in a few diseased minds such as those of Nathan Larson with his ideas about enslaving women as well as those of abortion restrictionists and their fetish for enslaving women (but only during pregnancy).

  13. Great ideas

    And:

    Andrew Jacobs: “Pregnancy is only forced if it resulted from a rape.” No, pregnancy itself is a form of rape if a woman wants to terminate it and is forcibly prevented from doing so. Likewise, rape is rape even if a woman consented to sex and later changes her mind during the act, and her partner or partners continue against her express wishes. It’s her body and she has the right to decide what goes in it, what comes out and when, whether that be a penis or a fetus or a body part or foreign object of any sort. Anything else is, well, rape.

    “Rape would be the only moral justification I could see for abortion.” The only moral justification that a woman needs to abort a fetus is that she no longer wants it in her body. But suppose we were to grant the absurd premise above. This places an undue burden on a woman to report a rape and go through the public humiliation of a rape trial, where her sexual activities are up for cross-examination in order to protect the rights of the accused. She may not have enough proof to demonstrate beyond the shadow of a doubt that a rape occurred, even if it did. Most rapes occur between people who know each other, often people who are in a relationship or related; she may have decidedly mixed feelings about prosecuting the rapist(s) and sending him or them to prison. There are many reasons why most rapes are not reported and prosecuted, and some rapists are not convicted even when they are.

    Any scheme for making abortions illegal will result in numerous rape victims being forced to carry pregnancies resulting from those rapes to term. Even in the case of a conviction, rape prosecutions take a period of time, which may well be longer than a pregnancy. It’s not clear whether there would be any practical way to have rape prosecutions take place fast enough to allow abortions and protect the rights of the accused at the same time. In fact, if we were to grant the absurd idea that abortion is murder, women would be prosecuted for murder when they have a miscarriage, with a burden to prove that they did not induce an abortion. This already happens in several countries. It’s simply a fallacy that consent to sex is consent to carry a pregnancy to term. And if we were to grant the absurd idea that a fetus is a person with rights, why would a fetus be condemned to death for the actions of his or her father? By even allowing the idea of a rape exception you implicitly admit that your arguments about abortion being “murder” are dishonest.

  14. paulie

    GI,

    Regardless of whether your ideas are great or not so great you seem rather…obsessed… with Andy, and not in a very healthy way. Shouldn’t “great” ideas stand on their own merits, regardless of personalities?

  15. Just Some Random Guy

    @ paulie

    Wicks’ position on SS is a lot different than Browne’s. A plan to end SS without a transition is a red herring to the discussion, since neither Wicks nor anyone else here has proposed such a plan.

    Perhaps, but as a newly-elected congressperson, however much of a plan you have really doesn’t matter because you really aren’t in a real position to do much about it. I would have liked a little more detail on it, such as perhaps an acknowledgment that while the people who paid for social security in the past are entitled to it, that he wants it phased out in the future, but on the whole I’m okay with it.

    I should also note that Andy is hijacking yet another thread to bring discussion of immigration when no one was talking about it. This is getting more than a little tiresome, and we have received a number of complaints through a variety of media (email, fb, personal and phone conversations etc) from various forum readers about this specifically. Please cut out or at least limit the excessive threadjacking.

    While I do agree that Andy randomly bringing up the issue of immigration was annoying, I don’t think it’s fair to slam him for it but not Carol considering she did the exact same thing with abortion here.

  16. paulie

    While I do agree that Andy randomly bringing up the issue of immigration was annoying, I don’t think it’s fair to slam him for it but not Carol considering she did the exact same thing with abortion here.

    Fair point. Carol is at least as obsessed with abortion as Andy is with immigration (and it appears increasingly with abortion as well, although maybe that’s in response to Carol). The difference is one of degree, in that Andy has been far more diligent in turning a far larger number of threads to discussions of immigration than Carol has in turning threads into discussions of abortion. Some degree of threadjacking is IMO fine and a part of IPR tradition, but there’s some point when enough is enough or more to the point more than enough, hence my point to Andy. Some other IPR editors and readers who have communicated with us have recommended everything from a quarantine thread to an actual ban, but I am not in favor of that at this point.

  17. Great ideas

    Paul Frankel: “Regardless of whether your ideas are great or not so great you seem rather…obsessed… with Andy, and not in a very healthy way. Shouldn’t “great” ideas stand on their own merits, regardless of personalities?” Well we at the Committee of Great Ideas do appreciate Mr. Frankel standing up to defend his life partner. But really, our ideas are great, regardless of what controversial ballot access for pay contractors think of them. And, it’s simply not true that we are obsessed with Mr. Jacobs, although we do feel that his constant keyboard diarrhea, rainmanesque single mindedness and tunnel vision, paranoia, obsessions and general far right wing nuttiness are deleterious to discussions here.

    Speaking of unhealthy obsessions, is Andrew Jacobs still chasing after Christy Steele? Is he still pursuing his frenemy, the fake veterans charity scammer, voter registration fraudster and former LP political operative Gary Fincher who Andy says owes him money (and who says Andy beat him up savagely)? Well, at least we don’t have to wonder whether Andy Jacobs is still obsessed with Gov. Johnson and Gov. Weld, since he updates us about that every single day.

  18. Great ideas

    Andy Jacobs is that Sonny “Camel Jockeys” Landham “libertarian”…that Hal from North Bergen Turner “libertarian”…that Bradley Smith from CODOH “libertarian”…that Timothy McVeigh “libertarian”… Oh Yes, he’s that “libertarian.”

  19. NewFederalist

    Just to get back on track… is there any persuasive evidence that this campaign has any real prospects for success or is this just another major fundraising attempt? Throughout the years I have heard many appeals like this with some genuinely sincere claims of potential electoral success. None of them ever came close. What makes this one different?

  20. Andy

    Abortion is not a high priority issue for me because I do not think that anything can realistically be done about it anytime soon. Even libertarians and constitutionalists are divided on the issue, as is the general public. Maybe taxpayer funding for it could be cut off, but that is about it. I think that abortion is probably a bad moral decision, but unless there is a major shift in societal attitudes over it, where a super-majority are against it, I see the issue remaining pretty much as it is now.

    I prefer to focus on other issues where I think more progress can be made, like jury nullification, gun rights, ending the drug war, ending the Federal Reserve and promoting alternative currencies, etc…

  21. Just Some Random Guy

    @ NewFederalist

    Just to get back on track… is there any persuasive evidence that this campaign has any real prospects for success or is this just another major fundraising attempt? Throughout the years I have heard many appeals like this with some genuinely sincere claims of potential electoral success. None of them ever came close. What makes this one different?

    Polls indicate that the Libertarian candidate is at about 11%:
    http://mtcowgirl.com/2017/03/23/rob-quist-leads-in-2nd-straight-poll-gianforte-missing/

    Though while comparing poll numbers to final results isn’t quite fair, for whatever it’s worth that’s already higher than any Libertarian managed in any of the House races in 2016 where they were up against a Democrat and Republican. Now, obviously that’s still a long way from how the Republican and Democratic candidates are polling, but they’ve presumably had more opportunities (so far) for advertising. If he were to get some decent support monetary-wise and be able to do more advertising and make himself more known, I do think there could be a shot of success. The question, of course, is whether he will be able to get the support necessary to do that.

  22. Andy

    Great ideas
    March 25, 2017 at 19:15
    “Andy Jacobs is that Sonny ‘Camel Jockeys'” Landham”

    I STRONGLY disagreed with Sonny Landham on foreign policy. He wanted to bomb nations in the Middle East. I support a non-interventionist, peaceful foreign policy. Landham also supported nationalizing industries, something else which I vehemently oppose.

    “‘libertarian’ that Hal from North Bergen Turner “libertarian”…

    Hal Turner was a national socialist (I believe), which is something I reject, and it later came out that he was working as a government plant.

    “that Bradley Smith from CODOH ‘libertarian’…

    I would have to look this person up.

    “that Timothy McVeigh ‘libertarian’… Oh Yes, he’s that ‘libertarian.'”

    The Oklahoma City bombing was an inside job. McVeigh was a patsy.

  23. paulie

    “‘libertarian’ that Hal from North Bergen Turner “libertarian”…

    Hal Turner was a national socialist (I believe), which is something I reject, and it later came out that he was working as a government plant.

    At one point before he came out as a nazi, Turner was LP candidate Murray Sabrin’s campaign manager. He also headed Pat Buchanan’s campaign in NJ in 1992. He was always a race baiter even before he came out of the closet as a full blown racist.

    “that Bradley Smith from CODOH ‘libertarian’…

    I would have to look this person up.

    Holocaust revisionist.

    Well we at the Committee of Great Ideas

    Do you prefer COGs or CGI for an acronym?

    do appreciate Mr. Frankel

    Yes, it’s not a secret anymore what my last name is, just as Andy’s last name is not a secret. But why do you obsess with repeating it over and over? You don’t give us the same opportunity in regards to your “committee” which uses screen names and IP anonymizers. Personally, I do believe in privacy rights and think it is A-OK to be pseudonymized here if you want but then you lose your credibility to make personal attacks (which aren’t exactly in the realm of “great ideas” to begin with).

    his life partner

    lol, no.

    But really, our ideas are great,

    If someone has to tell you their ideas are great they probably are not.

    And, it’s simply not true that we are obsessed with Mr. Jacobs

    I don’t believe you.

  24. Carol Moore

    Ok, to get more specific on my problem with what he wrote about social security. (Plus I didn’t have big cup of coffee this am so not easily TRIGGERED):

    The candidate’s website wrote: “That is why his highest priority as a congressman is reducing the debt to keep Social Security stable for this generation and the next. Social security is not a handout. You paid for it, you deserve to get it!”

    I made the point that in 6 years I’ve gotten about 10 times more back than I put into social security AND medicare. And about 300% as much as put into social security alone. A percent that will just increase for the next 20 years of my life…

    All we “deserve” is to get back what we paid in, maybe with interest. All of it paid out of sales of govt property. What he writes sounds like a RIGHT of individuals to GET everything they THINK Congress promised them, when in fact the very law makes it clear that congress CAN change the whole deal any time it wants. It’s y going far down the slippery slope to the “right” to social security – like the “right” to government paid health insurance which Dems are pushing. Obviously the guy’s probably a new libertarian candidate who hasn’t learned all the nuances, but it would be nice to think the LP will continue bugging people.

    Maybe circulating the best platforms from other LP candidates, like Browne’s, would help.

    Considering I use my money to support my libertarian efforts (even if they have been mostly for the last year defending fertile womens rights against Alleged libertarians), I don’t feel guilty about LOOTING the young. I’m working for them NOT to be looted for the rest of their lives.

  25. Andy

    “At one point before he came out as a nazi, Turner was LP candidate Murray Sabrin’s campaign manager. He also headed Pat Buchanan’s campaign in NJ in 1992. He was always a race baiter even before he came out of the closet as a full blown racist.”

    Hal Turner also “came out” (or more accurately, got exposed) as being on the government pay roll, as in it came out that he was a plant working for the FBI.

  26. Great ideas

    Andrew Jacobs (bottom line: BS), “Hal Turner also “came out” (or more accurately, got exposed) as being on the government pay roll, as in it came out that he was a plant working for the FBI.” How long before the same comes out (or more accurately, gets exposed) about you, Andy?

  27. Andy

    Carol, I agree with you that this Libertarian Party candidate from Montana is framing the issue of Social Security in a bad way. It is one thing to say that people who are over a certain age should get the Social Security money they were promised, but the candidate makes it sound like Social Security should be preserved for everyone. I don’t know if this candidate really thinks that Social Security is a good program that ought to be preserved, or if they are just doing what I’d call a poor job of framing this issue.

    If I were running for federal office, my position on Social Security would be to phase it out. Pay off the older people who are dependent on the program (by cutting spending in other areas, and/or by selling off government assets), and free the younger people from the program.

  28. Andy

    “Great ideas
    ‘March 26, 2017 at 12:58
    Andrew Jacobs (bottom line: BS), “Hal Turner also “came out” (or more accurately, got exposed) as being on the government pay roll, as in it came out that he was a plant working for the FBI.’ How long before the same comes out (or more accurately, gets exposed) about you, Andy?”

    Since it is not true, never.

  29. Andy

    Notice how “Great Ideas” says all of this stuff under a fake name and an IP anonymizer. I am attacked by cowardly anonymous trolls because I strike too close the the truth and I’m too effective,

  30. Great ideas

    Andrew Jacobs, how do you know it’s a fake name? Maybe my parents named me great ideas. Sure, that sounds kind of unlikely. But then so does you striking too close to the truth or you being effective at anything other than totally disrupting the conversations here. Being anonymous and being a troll are two different things. We are anonymous; you are a troll.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *